Hgf-sf monoclonal antibody combinations

ABSTRACT

The present invention provides a combination of anti-HGF/SF antibodies that specifically bind HGF/SF and inhibits HGF/SF activity. The present invention further provides a combination of anti-HGF/SF antibodies comprising three or more anti-HGF/SF antibodies selected from the group consisting of: antibody #1 produced from hybridoma 1C10-F1-A11, antibody #4 produced from hybridoma 8H2-F2-B10, antibody #5 produced from hybridoma 13B1-E4-E10, antibody #7 produced from hybridoma 15D7-B2, and antibody #10 produced from hybridoma 31D4-C9-D4. The invention also provides a method of treating cancer in a subject comprising administering to the subject a combination of anti-HGF/SF antibodies whereby the antibodies bind to a hepatocyte growth factor, whereby the binding of the antibodies to a hepatocyte growth factor results in an inhibition of hepatocyte growth factor binding to the hepatocyte growth factor receptor, whereby the inhibition of hepatocyte growth factor binding to receptor causes an inhibition of cancer growth, thereby treating the cancer.

This application claims priority to U.S. provisional application Ser.No. 60/164,173 filed on Nov. 9, 1999. The 60/164,173 provisional patentapplication is herein incorporated by this reference in its entirety.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention relates to combinations of monoclonal antibodieswhich specifically bind or recognize the antigen hepatocyte growthfactor/scatter factor (HGF/SF) and inhibit HGF/SF activity. Theapplication also relates to the use of the antibody in detectionmethods, in methods of identifying developmental disorders, and intherapy of particular conditions, such as cancer and liver disorders.

2. Background Art

HGF/SF is a heterodimeric molecule composed of an α-chain containing theN-terminal domain and four kringle domains (NK4), covalently disulfidelinked to a serine protease-like β-chain. Acting through its receptorc-MET, HGF/SF initiates mitogenic, motogenic and morphogenic activitiesin a wide variety of cells. The N-terminal domain with the first kringle(NK1) or first two kringles (NK2) can bind to c-MET receptor withreduced affinity (10 and 4 fold respectively) when compared to wild-typeHGF/SF, and both NK molecules show partial biological activity of HGF/SF(e.g., NK1 is an agonist while NK2 is an antagonists. The β-chain bindsto the c-MET receptor specifically occupied with α-chain, but deletionof the β-chain results in loss of multiple biological activities ofHGF/SF (1-5).

HGF/SF (hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor) is an effector of cellsexpressing the Met tyrosine kinase receptor (Gherardi et al. 1993.Hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor (HGF/SF), the c-met receptor andthe behavior of epithelial cells.” Symp. Soc. Exp. Biol. 47:163-181;Matsumoto et al. 1992. “Hepatocyte growth factor: molecular structure,roles in liver regeneration, and other biological functions.” Crit. Rev.Oncog. 3:27-54 and Rubin et al. 1991. “Hepatocyte growth factor/scatterfactor and its receptor, the c-met proto-oncogene product.” Biochim.Biophys. Acta 1155: 357-371). It is produced by mesenchymal cells andacts predominantly on cells of epithelial origin in an endocrine and/orparacrine fashion (Sonnenberg et al. 1993. “Scatter factor/hepatocytegrowth factor and its receptor the c-met tyrosine kinase, can mediate asignal exchange between mesenchyme and epithelia during mousedevelopment.” J. Cell Biol. 123:223-235 and Stoker et al. 1987. “Scatterfactor is a fibroblast-derived modulator of epithelial cell mobility.”Nature 327: 239-242). As its name implies, HGF/SF promotes the growthand/or scattering of various cell types. HGF/SF has also been shown tomediate other biological activities, including the formation of tubules(Montesano et al. 1991. “Identification of a fibroblast-derivedepithelial morphogen as hepatocyte growth factor.” Cell 67:901-908) andlumens (Tsarfaty et al. 1992. “The met proto-oncogene receptor and lumenformation.” Science 257:1258-1261), the promotion of angiogenesis(Bussolino et al. 1992. “Hepatocyte growth factor is a potent angiogenicfactor which stimulates endothelial cell motility and growth.” J. Cell.Biol. 119: 629-641), the inhibition of cell growth (Higashio et al.1993. “Tumor cytotoxic activity of HGF/SF.” Exper. Suppl, 65:351-368)and the conversion from a mesenchymal to an epithelial phenotype(Tsarfaty et al. 1994. “Met mediated signaling in mesenchymal toepithelial cell conversion.” Science 263:98-101). In vivo, thisligand-receptor pair is believed to play a role in neural induction(Streit et al. 1995. “A role for HGF/SF in neural induction and itsexpression in Hensen's node during gastrulation.” Development121:813-824), kidniey development (Santos et al. 1994. “Involvement ofhepatocyte growth factor in kidney development.” Dev. Biol.163:525-529), tissue regeneration (Matsumoto et al. 1993. “Roles of HGFas a pleiotropic factor in organ regeneration.” Birkhauser-Verlag,Basel), wound healing (Nusrat et al. 1994. “Hepatocyte growthfactor/scatter factor effects on epithelia. Regulation of intercellularjunctions in transformed and nontransformed cell lines, basolateralpolarization of c-met receptor in transformed and natural intestinalepithelia, and induction of rapid wound repair in a transformed modelepithelium.” J. Clin. Invest. 93:2056-2065) and is required for normalembryological development (Uehara et al. 1995. “Placental defect andembryonic lethality in mice lacking hepatocyte growth factor/scatterfactor.” Nature 373:702-705). Decreased levels of HGF/SF could result indefective organogenesis resulting in developmental abnormalities.Conversely, increased HGF/SF-Met signaling after tissue injury, such ashepatic injury, could lead to abnormal tissue regeneration whichcontributes to chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis, and/or liver cancer.

HGF/SF-Met signaling is also important in tumor development andprogression. Met was originally isolated as the product of a humanoncogene, trp-met, which encodes an altered Met protein possessingconstitutive, ligand-independent tyrosine kinase activity andtransforming ability. (Cooper et al. 1984. “Molecular cloning of a newtransforming gene from a chemically transformed human cell line” Nature311:29-33). The coexpression of unaltered Met and HGF/SF molecules inthe same cell, which generates an autocrine stimulatoiy loop, induces anoncogenic transformation of those cells. (Bellusci et al. 1994.“Creation of a hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor autocrine loop incarcinoma cells induces invasive properties associated with increasedtumorigenicity.” Oncogene 9:1091-1099).

In addition to transforming cells, deregulated Met signaling in cellsincreases their invasiveness in vitro (Giordano et al. 1993. “Transferof mitogenic and invasive response to scatter factor/hepatocyte growthfactor by transfection of human MET protooncogene.” Proc. Natl. Acad.Sci. USA 90:649-653) and metastatic potential in vivo (Rong et al. 1994.“Invasiveness and metastasis of NIH/3T3 cells induced by Met-HGF/SFautocrine stimulation.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91:4731-4735).HGF/SF-Met-signaling also induces the invasiveness and metastaticpotential of other cell types (Bellusci et al. 1994). The detection ofsignificant levels of HGF/SF in the pleural effusion fluid of patientswhose cancer had metastasized to the pleura (Kenworthy et al. 1992. “Thepresence of scatter factor in patients with metastatic spread to thepleura.” Br. J. Cancer 66:243-247) demonstrates the involvement ofHGF/SF-Met signaling in promoting metastasis in humans.

For example, although HGF/SF is synthesized by mesenchymal cells andacts predominantly on Met-expressing epithelial cells, it has beendemonstrated that human sarcoma cell lines often inappropriately expresshigh levels of Met and respond mitogenically to HGF/SF (Rong et al.1995. “Met proto-oncogene product is overexpressed in tumors ofp53-deficient mice and tumors of Li-Fraumeni patients. Cancer Res.55:1963-1970 and Rong et al. 1993. “Met expression and sarcomatumorigenicity.” Cancer Res. 53:5355-5360). It has also been shown thatclinical sarcoma samples may overexpress the Met receptor (Rong et al.1993 and Rong et al. 1995). Studies on lung adenocarcinomas revealedincreased Met staining in these tumors (Ichimura et al. 1996.“Expression of c-met/HGF receptor in human non-small cell lungcarcinomas in vitro and in vivo and its prognostic significance. Jpn. J.Cancer Res. 87:1063-1069 and Liu and Tsao 1993. “Proto-oncogene andgrowth factor/receptor expression in the establishment of primary humannon-small cell lung carcinoma cell lines. Am. J. Pathol. 142:413-423.).Thus, this receptor-ligand pair is known to be involved in humanoncogenesis and HGF/SF-Met signaling dramatically induces the in vitroinvasiveness and in vivo metastatic potential of cells.

Due to its involvement in tumorigenesis, organogenesis, andregeneration, it is desirable to quantify the amount of HGF present intissues in order to diagnose abnormalities associated with irregular HGFexpression.

This invention provides monoclonal antibodies that allowcharacterization of HGF expression in tumor-tissues. The diagnosticaspects of these antibodies can be extended to the characterization ofdevelopmental abnormalities associated with HGF/SF-Met signaling such asdisorders of the kidney, liver, lung, skeletal muscle and other organs.In addition to its diagnostic properties, the HGF monoclonal antibodiesact as inhibitors by blocking the interaction between HGF/SF and Met. Inso doing, the antibody inhibits metastasis and decreases tumorigenecity.With respect to regenerative responses, the antibody is used to preventabnormal regeneration and its untoward effects including tumorigenesis.

This invention provides several combinations of monoclonal antibodiesthat act as inhibitors of the MET-HGF/SF signaling pathway. In addition,these antibodies are useful in ELISA, immunoprecipitation studies andfor immunohistochemical staining of paraffin sections. Since HGF/SF isknown to be an important mediator of mitogenesis (hepatocytes),motogenesis (cell motility) and morphogenesis, and is involved inembryonic development, wound-healing, tissue organ regeneration,angiogenesis and carcinogenesis (7-10), these neutralizing Mabs areuseful for a broad range of biomedical research activities and clinicalapplications.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention provides a combination of anti-HGF/SF antibodiesthat specifically bind HGF/SF and inhibits HGF/SF activity.

The present invention further provides a combination of anti-HGF/SFantibodies comprising three or more anti-HGF/SF antibodies selected fromthe group consisting of: antibody #1 produced from hybridoma1C10-F1-A11, antibody #4 produced from hybridoma 8H2-F2-B10, antibody #5produced from hybridoma 13B1 E4-E10, antibody #7 produced from hybridoma15D7-B2, and antibody #10 produced from hybridoma 31D4-C9-D4. Throughoutthe present application, antibody #1 is also described as antibody A.1,antibody #4 is also described as antibody A.4, antibody #5 is alsodescribed as antibody A.5, antibody #7 is also described as antibody A.7and antibody #1.0 is also described as antibody A.10.

The invention also provides a method of treating cancer in a subjectcomprising administering to the subject a combination of anti-HGF/SFantibodies whereby the antibodies bind to a hepatocyte growth factor,whereby the binding of the antibodies to a hepatocyte growth factorresults in an inhibition of hepatocyte growth factor binding to thehepatocyte growth factor receptor, whereby the inhibition of hepatocytegrowth factor binding to receptor causes an inhibition of cancer growth,thereby treating the cancer.

The invention ether provides a method of screening a subject for thepresence of a developmental disorder comprising: contacting a tissuesample from the subject with a combination of anti-HGF/SF antibodies,detecting the binding of the antibodies with an antigen in the tissuesample, whereby a reduction in binding of antigen to the antibodies inthe tissue sample relative to the binding of antigen from a controltissue sample to the antibodies indicates a decreased amount ofhepatocyte growth factor in the sample, whereby the reduction in theamount of hepatocyte growth factor indicates a developmental disorder ispresent in the patient, thereby screening the subject for the presenceof a developmental disorder.

The invention also provides a method of determining the progression ofcancer comprising contacting a tissue sample from a patient having acancer with a combination of anti HGF/SF antibodies, detecting thebinding of the antibodies with an antigen, measuring the amount ofantigen in the sample, and correlating the binding of the antibodieswith the antigen with a clinically defined stage of cancer development,thereby determining the progression of cancer in the patient.

The invention also provides a method of detecting the presence of cancerin a patient comprising: contacting a tissue sample from the subjectwith a combination of anti-HGF/SF antibodies, detecting the binding ofthe antibodies with an antigen in the sample, whereby an increasedbinding of antigen to the antibodies relative to the binding of antigenfrom a control tissue sample to the antibodies indicates an increasedamount of hepatocyte growth factor in the sample, whereby the increasedamount of hepatocyte growth factor indicates the presence of canceroustissue in the sample, thereby detecting the presence of cancer in thepatient.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1. Epitope mapping by antibody interference. Each antibody in turnis placed in the primary position, and the relative binding of eachantibody in the panel of antibodies in the sandwich is evaluated. Themean signal due to all non-self associating antibodies used as both theprimary and secondary positions are taken as the value for completeinterference. When the sandwich signal is greater than two standarddeviations above the complete interference level, two antibodies arebinding independently to the HGF/SF, when signal is equal to or lessthan the complete interference level, the two antibodies interfere. Thedata shows that antibodies 1, 7 and 10 recognize different epitopes ofHGF/SF, 4 and 5 interfere with each other and recognize other epitopesof HGF/SF.

FIG. 2. Neutralization of HGF/SF mediated MDCK cell scattering. A: MDCKcells only. B: Human HGF/SF (20 ng/ml). C: Human HGF/SF (20 ng/ml) plusMabs A.1, 5, 7 (1 ug/ml). D: Human HGF/SF (20 ng/ml) plus Mabs 7-2, 3,4(30 ug/ml).

FIG. 3. Neutralization of HGF/SF mediated SK-LMS-1 cells branchingmorphogenesis.

A: SK-LMS-1 cells only. B: Human HGF/SF (250 ng/ml). C: Human HGF/SF(250 ng/ml) plus Mabs A. 1,5,7 (8 ug/ml). D: Human HGF/SF (250 ng/ml)plus Mabs 7-2,3,4 (32 ug/ml).

FIG. 4. Inhibition of C127 tumor growth by neutralizing Mab to HGF/SF.2×10⁵ C-127 tumor cells were injected s.c. into athymic nude mice in 100ul PBS on day 0. Anti-hHGF/SF Mab A.1,5,7 or Mab 7-2,3,4 antibodies wereadministered either sub-cutaneously (intra-tumor) or i.p. every day for20 days. One group of animals did not receive antibody. The values arean average of the size of five tumors in mm³.

FIG. 5. Inhibition of U-118 glioblastoma tumor growth by neutralizingMab to huHGF/SF. 5×10⁵ U-118 human glioblastoma tumor cells wereinjected s.c. into athymic nude mice. On day 1, anti-HGF/SF Mab A.1,5,7or Mab 7-2,3 were administered either s.c. (intra-tumor) or i.p. twice aweek for 10 weeks (70 days). One group of animals did not receiveantibody. The values are an average size of 6-7 tumors (in mm³).

FIG. 6. Tumor regression experiment using U-118 GBM cells. 5×10⁵ GBMcells were s.c. injected to athymic nude mice. After 30 days, animalswere divided to 5 groups with average tumor size about 100 mm³. MAbA.1,5,7 or 7-2,3 were administered either s.c. (intra-tumor) or i.p.every two days until ten weeks. One group of mice did not receiveantibody. The values are an average size of 8 to 9 tumors in mm³.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The present invention may be understood more readily by reference to thefollowing detailed description, of the preferred embodiments of theinvention.

Before the present methods are disclosed and described, it is to beunderstood that this invention is not limited to specific compounds andmethods, as such may of course, vary. It is also to be understood thatthe terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particularembodiments only and is not intended to be limiting.

It must be noted that, as used in the specification and the appendedclaims, the singular forms “a,” “an,” and “the” include plural referentsunless the context clearly dictates otherwise. For example, a cell canmean a single cell or more than one cell.

As used herein, the terms “hepatocyte growth factor” and “HGF” refer toa growth factor typically having a structure with six domains (finger,Kringle 1, Kringle 2, Kringle 3, Kringle 4 and serine protease domains).Fragments of HGF constitute HGF with fewer domains and variants of HGFmay have some of the domains of HGF repeated; both are included if theystill retain their respective-ability to bind a HGF receptor. The terms“hepatocyte growth factor” and “HGF” include hepatocyte growth factorfrom humans (“huHGF”) and any non-human mammalian species, and inparticular rat HGF. The terms as used herein include mature, pre,pre-pro, and pro forms, purified from a natural source, chemicallysynthesized or recombinantly produced. Human HGF is encoded by the cDNAsequence published by Miyazawa et al., 1989 (“Molecular Cloning andSequence Analysis of cDNA for Human Hepatocyte Growth Factor” Biochem. &Biophys. Res. Comm. 163:967-973), or Nakamura et al., 1989 (“Molecular.Cloning and Expression of Human Hepatocyte Growth Factor” Nature342:440-443). The sequences reported by Miyazawa et al. and Nakamura etal. differ in 14 amino acids. The reason for the differences is notentirely clear, polymorphism or cloning artifacts are among thepossibilities. Both sequences are specifically encompassed by theforegoing terms. It will be understood that natural allelic variationsexist and can occur among individuals, as demonstrated by one or moreamino acid differences in the amino acid sequence of each individual.The terms “hepatocyte growth factor” and “HGF” specifically include thedelta5 huHGF as disclosed by Seki et al. (“Isolation and Expression ofcDNA for Different Forms of Hepatocyte Growth Factor from HumanLeukocyte” Biochem. and Biophys. Res. Commun. 172:321-327 (1990)) andthe variants disclosed by Rubin et al. (“A broad-spectrum human lungfibroblast-derived mitogen is a variant of hepatocyte growth factor”PNAS 88:415-419 (1991) and “Identification of a competitive HGFantagonist encoded by an alternative transcript” Science 254:1382-5(1991).

The terms “hepatocyte growth factor receptor” and “Met” when used hereinrefer to a cellular receptor for hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), whichtypically includes an extracellular domain, a transmembrane domain andall intracellular domain, as well as variants and fragments thereofwhich retain the ability to bind HGF. The terms “hepatocyte growthfactor receptor” and “Met” include the polypeptide molecule thatcomprises the full-length, native amino acid sequence encoded by thegene known as p190. The present definition specifically encompassessoluble forms of HGF receptor, and HGF receptor from natural sources,synthetically produced in vitro or obtained by genetic manipulationincluding methods of recombinant DNA technology. The HGF receptorvariants or fragments preferably share at least about 65% sequencehomology, and preferably at least about 75% sequence homology morepreferably at least about 85% sequence homology and most preferably atleast about 95% sequence homology with any domain of the human-Met aminoacid sequence published in Rodrigues et al., Mol. Cell. Biol.,11:2962-2970 (1991); Park et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 84:6379-6383(1987); or Ponzetto et al., Oncogene, 6:553-559 (1991).

The present invention provides a combination of anti-HGF/SF monoclonalantibodies that specifically bind HGF/SF and inhibit HGF/SF activity.The term “HGF/SF activity” when used herein refers to any mitogenic,motogenic or morphogenic activities of HGF or any activities occurringas a result of HGF binding to a HGF receptor.

The term “inhibition” or, “inhibit” is familiar to one skilled in theart and is used herein to describe any compound or composition whichalters HGF activity. Preferably, inhibition refers to a decrease inHGF/SF activity. The degree of inhibition does not have to be complete,such as completely inhibiting HGF activity. Therefore inhibitioncomprises any inhibition of the activity of HGF relative to the activityof HGF in a similar environment in the absence of an inhibiting compoundsuch as a combination of monoclonal antibodies of the present invention.

The present invention also provides a combination of anti-HGF/SFantibodies comprising three or more anti-HGF/SF antibodies selected fromthe group consisting of: antibody #1 produced from hybridoma1C10-F1-A11, antibody #4 produced from hybridoma 8H2-F2-B10, antibody #5produced from hybridoma 13B1-E4-E10, antibody #7 produced from hybridoma15D7-B2, and antibody #10 produced from hybridoma 31D4-C9-D4.

In a preferred embodiment, this invention provides a combination ofanti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibodies that specifically bind HGF/SF andinhibit HGF/SF activity, comprising antibody #1 produced from hybridoma1C10-F1-A11, antibody #5 produced from hybridoma 13B1-E4-E10 andantibody #7 produced from hybridoma 15D7-B2.

In yet another embodiment, this invention provides a combination ofanti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibodies that specifically bind HGF/SF andinhibit HGF/SF activity, comprising antibody #1 produced from hybridoma1C10-F1-A11, antibody #4 produced from hybridoma 8H2-F2-B10 and antibody#7 produced from hybridoma 15D7-B2.

In yet another embodiment this invention provides a combination ofanti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibodies that specifically bind HGF/SF andinhibit HGF/SF activity, comprising antibody #1 produced from hybridoma1C10-F1-A11, antibody #4 produced from hybridoma 8H2-F2-B10, antibody #5produced from hybridoma 1C10-F1-A11 and antibody #7 produced fromhybridoma 15D7-B2.

Also provided by this invention is a combination of anti-HGF/SFmonoclonal antibodies that specifically bind HGF/SF and inhibit HGF/SFactivity, comprising antibody #1 produced from hybridoma 1C10-F1-A11,antibody #5 produced from hybridoma 13B1-E4-E10 and antibody #10produced from hybridoma 31D4-C9-D4.

Further provided by the present invention is a combination ofanti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibodies that specifically bind HGF/SF andinhibit HGF/SF activity, comprising antibody #1 produced from hybridoma1C10-F1-A11, antibody #4 produced from hybridoma 8H2-F2-B10 and antibody#10 produced from hybridoma 31D4-C9-D4.

Also provided by the present invention is a combination of anti-HGF/SFmonoclonal antibodies that specifically bind HGF/SF and inhibit HGF/SFactivity, comprising antibody #1 produced from hybridoma 1C10-F1-A11,antibody #4 produced from hybridoma-8H2-F2-B10, antibody #5 producedfrom hybridoma 13B1-E4-E10 and antibody #10 produced from hybridoma31D4-C9-D4.

Also provided by this invention is anti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibody A. 1produced from hybridoma 1C10-F1-A11 and a composition comprisinganti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibody A.1 produced from hybridoma 1C10-F1-A11.

Also provided by this invention is anti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibody A.4produced from hybridoma 8H2-F2-B10 and a composition comprisinganti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibody A.4 produced from hybridoma 8H2-F2-B10.

Also provided by this invention is anti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibody A.5produced from hybridoma 13B1-E4-E11 and a composition comprisinganti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibody A.5 produced from hybridoma13B1-E4-B110.

Also provided by this invention is anti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibody A.7produced from hybridoma 15D7-B2 and a composition comprising anti-HGF/SFmonoclonal antibody A.7 produced from hybridoma 15D7-B2.

Also provided by this invention is anti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibody A.10produced from hybridoma 31D4-C9-D4 and a composition comprisinganti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibody A.10 produced from hybridoma 31D4-C9-D4.

The invention provides compositions comprising each combination ofantibodies described herein.

The term “antibodies” is used herein in a broad sense and includesintact immunoglobulin molecules and fragments or polymers of thoseimmunoglobulin molecules, so long as they exhibit any of the desiredproperties described herein. Antibodies are typically proteins whichexhibit binding specificity to a specific antigen. Native antibodies areusually heterotetrameric glycoproteins, composed of two identical light(L) chains and two identical heavy (H) chains. Typically, each lightchain is linked to a heavy chain by one covalent disulfide bond, whilethe number of disulfide linkages varies between the heavy chains ofdifferent immunoglobulin isotypes. Each heavy and light chain also hasregularly spaced intrachain disulfide bridges. Each heavy chain has atone end a variable domain (V(H)) followed by a number of constantdomains. Each light chain has a variable domain at one end (V(L)) and aconstant domain at its other end; the constant domain of the light chainis aligned with the first constant domain of the heavy chain, and thelight chain variable domain is aligned with the variable domain of theheavy chain. Particular amino acid residues are believed to form aninterface between the light and heavy chain variable domains. The lightchains of antibodies from any vertebrate species can be assigned to oneof two clearly distinct types, called kappa (κ) and lambda (λ), based onthe amino acid sequences of their constant domains. Depending on theamino acid sequence of the constant domain of their heavy chains,immunoglobulins can be assigned to different classes. There are fivemajor classes of immunoglobulins: IgA, IgD, IgE, IgG and IgM, andseveral of these may be further divided into subclasses (isotypes),e.g., IgG-1, IgG-2, IgG-3, and IgG-4; IgA-1 and IgA-2. The heavy chainconstant domains that correspond to the different classes ofimmunoglobulins are called alpha, delta, epsilon, gamma, and mu,respectively.

The term “variable” is used herein to describe certain portions of thevariable domains which differ in sequence among antibodies and are usedin the binding and specificity of each particular antibody for itsparticular antigen. However, the variability is not usually evenlydistributed through the variable domains of antibodies. It is typicallyconcentrated in three segments called complementarity determiningregions (CDRs) or hypervariable regions both in the light chain and theheavy chain variable domains. The more highly conserved portions of thevariable domains are called the framework (FR). The variable domains ofnative heavy and light chains each comprise four FR regions, largelyadopting a β-sheet configuration, connected by three CDRs, which formloops connecting, and in some cases forming part of, the β-sheetstructure. The CDRs in each chain are held together in close proximityby the FR regions and, with the CDRs from the other chain, contribute tothe formation of the antigen binding site of antibodies (see Kabat E. A.et al., “Sequences of Proteins of Immunological Interest” NationalInstitutes of Health, Bethesda, Md. (1987)). The constant domains arenot involved directly in binding an antibody to an antigen, but exhibitvarious effector functions, such as participation of the antibody inantibody-dependent cellular toxicity.

The term “monoclonal antibody” as used herein refers to an antibodyobtained from a substantially homogeneous population of antibodies,i.e., the individual antibodies comprising the population are identicalexcept for possible naturally occurring mutations that may be present inminor amounts. The monoclonal antibodies herein specifically include“chimeric” antibodies in which a portion of the heavy and/or light chainis identical with or homologous to corresponding sequences in antibodiesderived from a particular species or belonging to a particular antibodyclass or subclass, while the remainder of the chain(s) is identical withor homologous to corresponding sequences in antibodies derived fromanother species or belonging to another antibody class or subclass, aswell as fragments of such antibodies, so long as they exhibit thedesired antagonistic activity (See, U.S. Pat. No. 4,816,567 and Morrisonet al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 81:6851-6855 (1984)).

Monoclonal antibodies of the invention may be prepared using hybridomamethods, such as those described by Kohler and Milstein, Nature, 256:495(1975). In a hybridoma method, a mouse or other appropriate host animal,is typically immunized with an immunizing agent to elicit lymphocytesthat produce or are capable of producing antibodies that willspecifically bind to the immunizing agent. Alternatively, thelymphocytes may be immunized in vitro.

Preferably, the immunizing agent includes the HGF/SF polypeptide or afusion protein thereof. The immunizing agent may alternatively comprisea fragment or portion of HGF having one or more amino acid residues thatparticipate in the binding of HGF to its receptor.

Generally, peripheral blood lymphocytes (“PBLs”) are used if cells ofhuman origin are desired, or spleen cells or lymph node cells are usedif non-human mammalian sources are desired. The lymphocytes are thenfused.with an immortalized cell line using a suitable fusing agent, suchas polyethylene glycol, to form a hybridoma cell (Goding, “MonoclonalAntibodies: Principles and Practice” Academic Press; (1986) pp. 59-103).Immortalized cell lines are usually transformed mammalian-cells,particularly myeloma cells of rodent, bovine and human origin. Usually,rat or mouse myeloma cell lines are employed. The hybridoma cells may becultured in a suitable culture medium that preferably contains one ormore substances that inhibit the growth or survival of the unfused,immortalized cells. For example, if the parental cells lack the enzymehypoxanthine guanine phosphoribosyl transferase (HGPRT or HPRT), theculture medium for the hybridomas typically will include hypoxanthine,aminopterin, and thymidine (“HAT medium”), which substances prevent thegrowth of HGPRT-deficient cells.

Preferred immortalized cell lines are those that fuse efficiently,support stable high level expression of antibody by the selectedantibody-producing cells, and are sensitive to a medium such as HATmedium. More preferred immortalized cell lines are murine myeloma lines,which can be obtained, for instance, from the Salk Institute CellDistribution Center, San Diego, Calif. and the American Type CultureCollection, Rockville, Md. Human myeloma and mouse-human heteromyelomacell lines also have been described for the production of humanmonoclonal antibodies (Kozbor, J. Immunol., 133:3001 (1984) and Brodeuret al, “Monoclonal Antibody Production Techniques and Applications”Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, (1987) pp. 51-63).

The culture medium in which the hybridoma cells are cultured can then beassayed for the presence of monoclonal antibodies directed against HGF.Preferably, the binding specificity of monoclonal antibodies produced bythe hybridoma cells is determined by immunoprecipitation or by an invitro binding assay, such as radioimmunoassay (RIA) or enzyme-linkedimmunoabsorbent assay (ELISA). Such techniques and assays are known inthe art, and are described further in the Examples below. The bindingaffinity of the monoclonal antibody can, for example, be determined bythe Scatchard analysis of Munson et al., Anal. Biochem., 107:220 (1980).

After the desired hybridoma cells are identified, the clones may besubcloned by limiting dilution procedures and grown by standard methods.Suitable culture media for this purpose include, for example, Dulbecco'sModified Eagle's Medium and RPMI-1640 medium. Alternatively, thehybridoma cells may be grown in vivo as ascites in a mammal.

The monoclonal antibodies secreted by the subclones may be isolated orpurified from the culture medium or ascites fluid by conventionalimmunoglobulin purification procedures such as, for example, proteinA-Sepharose, hydroxylapatite chromatography, gel electrophoresis,dialysis, or affinity chromatography.

The monoclonal antibodies may also be made by recombinant DNA methods,such as those described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,816,567. DNA encoding themonoclonal antibodies of the invention can be readily isolated andsequenced using conventional procedures (e.g., by using oligonucleotideprobes that are capable of binding specifically to genes encoding theheavy and light chains of murine antibodies). The hybridoma cells of theinvention serve as a preferred source of such DNA. Once isolated, theDNA may be placed into expression vectors, which are then transfectedinto host cells such as simian COS cells, Chinese hamster ovary (CHO)cells, or myeloma cells that do not otherwise produce immunoglobulinprotein, to obtain the synthesis of monoclonal antibodies in therecombinant host cells. The DNA also may be modified, for example, bysubstituting the coding sequence for human heavy and light chainconstant domains in place of the homologous murine sequences (U.S. Pat.No. 4,816,567) or by covalently joining to the immunoglobulin codingsequence all or part of the coding sequence for a non-immunoglobulinpolypeptide. Such a non-immunoglobulin polypeptide can be substitutedfor the constant domains of an antibody of the invention, or can besubstituted for the variable domains of one antigen-combining site of anantibody of the invention to create a chimeric bivalent antibodycomprising one antigen-combining site having specificity for a HGF andanother antigen-combining site having specificity for a differentantigen, such as HER2 or CD3.

Monovalent antibodies are also contemplated by this invention and may becapable of interfering with HGF, its fragments or its variants bindingto the HGF receptor, such as by sterically hindering access of HGF, itsfragments or its variants to the receptor.

In vitro methods are also suitable for preparing monovalent antibodies.Digestion of antibodies to produce fragments thereof, particularly, Fabfragments, can be accomplished using routine techniques known in theart. For instance, digestion can be performed using papain. Examples ofpapain digestion are described in WO 94/29348 and U.S. Pat. No.4,342,566. Papain digestion of antibodies typically produces twoidentical antigen binding fragments, called Fab fragments, each with asingle antigen binding site and a residual Fc fragment. Pepsin treatmentyields a fragment that has two antigen combining sites and is stillcapable of cross-linking antigen.

The Fab fragments produced in the antibody digestion also contain theconstant domains of the light chain and the first constant-domain of theheavy chain. Fab′ fragments differ from Fab fragments by the addition ofa few residues at the carboxy terminus of the heavy chain domainincluding one or more cysteines from the antibody hinge region. Fab′-SHis the designation herein for Fab′ in which the cysteine residue(s) ofthe constant domains bear a free thiol group. Antibody fragmentsoriginally were produced as pairs of Fab′ fragments which have hingecysteines between them. Other chemical couplings of antibody fragmentsare also known.

An isolated immunogenically specific epitope or fragment of the antibodyis also provided. A specific immunogenic epitope of the antibody can beisolated from the whole antibody by chemical or mechanical disruption ofthe molecule. The purified fragments thus obtained can be tested todetermine their immunogenicity and specificity by the methods taughtherein. Immunoreactive-epitopes of the antibody can also besynthesized-directly. An immunoreactive fragment is defined as an aminoacid sequence of at least about 5 consecutive amino acids derived fromthe antibody amino acid sequence.

One method of producing proteins comprising the antibodies of thepresent invention is to link two or more peptides or polypeptidestogether by protein chemistry techniques. For example, peptides orpolypeptides can be chemically synthesized using currently availablelaboratory equipment using either Fmoc (9-fluorenylmethyloxycarbonyl) orBoc (tert-butyloxycarbonoyl) chemistry. (Applied Biosystems, Inc.,Foster City, Calif.). One skilled in the art can readily appreciate thata peptide or polypeptide corresponding to an antibody can be synthesizedby standard chemical reactions. For example, a peptide or polypeptidecan be synthesized and not cleaved from its synthesis resin whereas theother fragment of an antibody can be synthesized and subsequentlycleaved from the resin, thereby exposing a terminal group which isfunctionally blocked on the other fragment. By peptide condensationreactions, these two fragments can be covalently joined via a peptidebond at their carboxyl and amino termini, respectively, to form anantibody, or fragment thereof. (Grant, G. A., “Synthetic Peptides: AUser Guide” W.H. Freeman and Co., N.Y. (1992) and Bodansky, M. andTrost, B., Ed., “Principles of Peptide Synthesis” Springer-Verlag Inc.,N.Y. (1993)). Alternatively, the peptide or polypeptide can byindependently synthesized in vivo as described above. Once isolated,these independent peptides or polypeptides may be linked to form anantibody or fragment thereof via similar peptide condensation reactions.

For example, enzymatic ligation of cloned or synthetic peptide segmentscan allow relatively short peptide fragments to be joined to producelarger peptide fragments, polypeptides or whole protein domains(Abrahmsen, L., et al., Biochemistry, 30:4151 (1991)). Alternatively,native chemical ligation of synthetic peptides can be utilized tosynthetically construct large peptides or polypeptides from shorterpeptide fragments. This method consists of a two step chemical reaction(Dawson, et al., “Synthesis of Proteins by Native Chemical Ligation”Science, 266:776-779 (1994)). The first step is the chemoselectivereaction of an unprotected synthetic peptide-α-thioester with anotherunprotected peptide segment containing an amino-terminal Cys residue togive a thioester-linked intermediate as the initial covalent product.Without a change in the reaction conditions, this intermediate undergoesspontaneous, rapid intramolecular reaction to form a native-peptide bondat the ligation site. Application of this native chemical ligationmethod to the total synthesis of a protein molecule is illustrated bythe preparation of human interleukin 8 (IL-8) (Clark-Lewis, L, et al.,FEBS Lett., 307:97 (1987), Clark-Lewis, I., et al., J. Biol. Chem.,269:16075 (1994), Clark-Lewis, I., et al., Biochemistry, 30:3128(1.991), and Rajarathnam, K, et al., Biochemistry, 29:1689 (1994)).

Alternatively, unprotected peptide segments can be chemically linkedwhere the bond formed between the peptide segments as a result of thechemical ligation is an unnatural (non-peptide) bond (Schnolzer, M., etal., Science, 256:221 (1992)). This technique has been used tosynthesize analogs of protein domains as well as large amounts ofrelatively pure proteins with full biological activity (deLisle Milton,R. C., et al., “Techniques in Protein Chemistry IV” Academic Press, NewYork, pp. 257-267 (1992)).

The invention also provides fragments of antibodies which havebioactivity. The polypeptide fragments of the present invention can berecombinant proteins obtained by cloning nucleic acids encoding thepolypeptide in an expression system capable of producing the polypeptidefragments thereof, such as the adenovirus system described herein. Forexample, one can determine the active domain of any of the antibodiesdescribed herein which can cause a biological effect associated with theinteraction of the antibody with the hepatocyte growth factor. Aminoacids found to not contribute to either the activity or the bindingspecificity or affinity of the antibody can be deleted without a loss inthe respective activity.

For example, amino or carboxy-terminal amino acids can be sequentiallyremoved from either the native or the modified non-immunoglobulinmolecule or the immunoglobulin molecule and the respective activityassayed in one of many available assays. In another example, a fragmentof an antibody can comprise a modified antibody wherein at least oneamino acid has been substituted for the naturally occurring amino acidat a specific position, and a portion of either amino terminal orcarboxy terminal amino acids, or even an internal region of theantibody, has been replaced with a polypeptide fragment or other moiety,such as biotin, which can facilitate in the purification of the modifiedantibody. For example, a modified antibody can be fused to a maltosebinding protein, through either peptide chemistry or cloning therespective nucleic acids encoding the two polypeptide fragments into anexpression vector such that the expression of the coding region resultsin a hybrid polypeptide. The hybrid polypeptide can be affinity purifiedby passing it over an amylose affinity column, and the modified antibodyreceptor can then be separated from the maltose binding region bycleaving the hybrid polypeptide with the specific protease factor Xa.(See, for example, New England Biolabs Product Catalog, 1996, pg. 164.).Similar purification procedures are available for isolating hybridproteins from eukaryotic cells as well.

The fragments, whether attached to other sequences or not, can alsoinclude insertions, deletions, substitutions, or other selectedmodifications of particular regions or specific amino acids residues,provided the activity of the peptide is not significantly altered orimpaired compared to the nonmodified antibody, or antibody fragment.These modifications can provide for some additional property, such as toremove/add amino acids capable of disulfide bonding, to increase itsbio-longevity, to alter its secretory characteristics, etc. In any case,the peptide must possess a bioactive property, such as binding activity,regulation of binding at the binding domain, etc. Functional or activeregions of the antibody may be identified by mutagenesis of a specificregion of the protein, followed by expression and testing of theexpressed polypeptide. Such methods are readily apparent to a skilledpractitioner in the art and can include site-specific mutagenesis of thenucleic acid encoding the receptor. (Zoller, M. J. et al.).

The antibodies of the invention may further comprise humanizedantibodies or human antibodies. Humanized forms of non-human (e.g.,murine) antibodies are chimeric immunoglobulins, immunoglobulin chainsor fragments thereof (such as Fv, Fab, Fab′ or other antigen-bindingsubsequences of antibodies) which contain minimal sequence derived fromnon-human immunoglobulin. Humanized antibodies include humanimmunoglobulins (recipient antibody) in which residues from acomplementarity determining region (CDR) of the recipient are replacedby residues from a CDR of a non-human species (donor antibody) such asmouse, rat or rabbit having the desired specificity, affinity andcapacity. In some instances, Fv framework residues of the humanimmunoglobulin are replaced by corresponding non-human residues.Humanized antibodies may also comprise residues which are found neitherin the recipient antibody nor in the imported CDR or frameworksequences. In general, the humanized antibody will comprisesubstantially all of at least one, and typically two, variable domains,in which all or substantially all of the CDR regions correspond to thoseof a non-human immunoglobulin and all or substantially all of the FRregions are those of a human immunoglobulin consensus sequence. Thehumanized antibody optimally also will comprise at least a portion of animmunoglobulin constant region (Fc), typically that of a humanimmunoglobulin (Jones et al., Nature, 321:522-525 (1986), Reichmann etal., Nature, 332:323-327 (1988), and Presta, Curr. Op. Struct. Biol.,2:593-596 (1992)).

Methods for humanizing non-human antibodies are well known in the art.Generally, a humanized antibody has one or more amino acid residuesintroduced into it from a source which is non-human. These non-humanamino acid residues are often referred to as “import” residues, whichare typically taken from an “import” variable domain. Humanization canbe essentially performed following the method of Winter and co-workers(Jones et al., Nature, 321:522-525 (1986), Riechmann et al., Nature,332:323-327 (1988), Verhoeyen et al., Science, 239:1534-1536 (1988)), bysubstituting rodent CDRs or CDR sequences for the correspondingsequences of a human antibody. Accordingly, such “humanized” antibodiesare chimeric antibodies (U.S. Pat. No. 4,816,567), wherein substantiallyless than an intact human variable domain has been substituted by thecorresponding sequence from a non-human species. In practice, humanizedantibodies are typically human antibodies in which some CDR residues andpossibly some FR residues are substituted by residues from analogoussites in rodent antibodies.

The choice of human variable domains, both light and heavy, to be usedin making the humanized antibodies is very important in order to reduceantigenicity. According to the “best-fit” method, the sequence of thevariable domain of a rodent antibody is screened against the entirelibrary of known human variable domain sequences. The human sequencewhich is closest to that of the rodent is then accepted as the humanframework (FR) for the humanized antibody (Sims et al., J. Immunol.,151:2296 (1993) and Chothia et al, J. Mol. Biol., 196:901 (1987)).Another method uses a particular framework derived from the consensussequence of all human antibodies of a particular subgroup of light orheavy chains. The same framework may be used for several differenthumanized antibodies (Carter et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 89:4285(1992); Presta et al., J. Immunol., 151:2623 (1993)).

It is further important that antibodies be humanized with retention ofhigh affinity for the antigen and other favorable biological properties.To achieve this goal, according to a preferred method, humanizedantibodies are prepared by a process of analysis of the parentalsequences and various conceptual humanized products using threedimensional models of the parental and humanized sequences. Threedimensional immunoglobulin models are commonly available and arefamiliar to those skilled in the art. Computer programs are availablewhich illustrate and display probable three-dimensional conformationalstructures of selected candidate immunoglobulin sequences. Inspection ofthese displays permits analysis of the likely role of the residues inthe functioning of the candidate immunoglobulin sequence, i.e., theanalysis of residues that influence the ability of the candidateimmunoglobulin to bind its antigen. In this way, FR residues can beselected and combined from the consensus and import sequence so that thedesired antibody characteristic, such as increased affinity for thetarget antigen(s), is achieved. In general, the CDR residues aredirectly and most substantially involved in influencing antigen binding(see, WO 94/04679 published 3 Mar. 1994).

Transgenic animals (e.g., mice) that are capable, upon immunization, ofproducing a full repertoire of human antibodies in the absence ofendogenous immunoglobulin production can be employed. For example, ithas been described that the homozygous deletion of the antibody heavychain joining region (J(H)) gene in chimeric and germ-line mutant miceresults in complete inhibition of endogenous antibody production.Transfer of the human germ-line immunoglobulin gene array in suchgerm-line mutant mice will result in the production of human antibodiesupon antigen challenge (see, e.g., Jakobovits et al., Proc. Natl. Acad.Sci. USA, 90:2551-255 (1993); Jakobovits et al., Nature, 362:255-258(1993); Bruggermann et al., Year in Immuno., 7:33 (1993)). Humanantibodies can also be produced in phage display libraries [Hoogenboomet al., J. Mol. Biol., 227:381 (1991); Marks et al., J. Mol. Biol.,222:581 (1991)]. The techniques of Cote et al. and Boerner et al. arealso available for the preparation of human monoclonal antibodies (Coleet al., Monoclonal Antibodies and Cancer Therapy, Alan R. Liss, p; 77(1985) and Boerner et al., J. Immunol., 147(1):86-95 (1991)].

The antibodies of this invention can be used as reagents and as researchtools to detect HGF and to detect cells and tissues that express HGF.The antibodies can also be utilized in competitive binding assays toscreen for and identify compounds that bind to HGF.

The present invention further provides a kit for detecting the bindingof an antibody to the hepatocyte growth factor. Particularly, the kitcan detect the presence of a hepatocyte growth factor specificallyreactive with the antibody or an immunoreactive fragment thereof. Thekit can include an antibody bound to a substrate, a secondary antibodyreactive with the antigen and a reagent for detecting a reaction of thesecondary antibody with the antigen. Such a kit can be an ELISA kit andcan comprise the substrate, primary and secondary antibodies whenappropriate, and any other necessary reagents such as detectablemoieties, enzyme substrates and color reagents as described above. Thediagnostic kit can, alternatively, be an immunoblot kit generallycomprising the components and reagents described herein.

The present invention also provides a method of treating cancer in asubject comprising administering to the subject a combination ofanti-HGF/SF antibodies, whereby the antibodies bind to a hepatocytegrowth factor, whereby the binding of the antibodies to a hepatocytegrowth factor results in an inhibition of hepatocyte growth factorbinding to the hepatocyte growth factor receptor, whereby the inhibitionof hepatocyte growth factor binding to receptor causes an inhibition ofcancer growth, thereby treating the cancer.

One skilled in the art could identify combinations of anti-HGF/SFantibodies that inhibit or neutralize HGF/SF binding to hepatocytegrowth factor by testing combinations of anti-HGF/SF antibodies forinhibiting or neutralizing activity in an MDCK scatter assay. Forexample, the skilled artisan would contact MDCK cells with HGF and acombination of anti-HGF/SF antibodies, as described in the Examples, andmicroscopically visualize the MDCK cells. If a particular combination ofanti-HGF/SF antibodies inhibits or neutralizes HGF/SF activity (e.g.scattering), the MDCK cells will not exhibit significant scatteringbehavior and will be comparable in number and morphology to MDCK cellsin the absence of HGF. An example of the microscopic differences betweenantibody combinations that neutralize HGF/SF and antibodies that do notis clearly illustrated in FIG. 2. The neutralizing activity of anantibody combination can be confirmed by performing branchingmorphogenesis assays with other cell types such as SK-LMS-1 cells andARZ-2 human renal carcinoma cells, as described in the Examples.Briefly, the cells are mixed with Matrigel and plated, HGF/SF or HGF/SFand a combination of anti-HGF/SF antibodies is added and the cells arethen visualized to determine the extent of branching morphogenesis. If aparticular combination of anti-HGF/SF antibodies inhibits or neutralizesHGF/SF activity, the cells will not branch significantly and will appearsimilar in number and morphology to, cells in the absence of HGF/SF.Therefore, the MDCK scatter assay and the branching morphogenesis assaycan also be combined to identify effective combinations of anti-HGF/SFantibodies.

As used herein, “treating” or “treatment” means partial or total killingof cancerous cells, reduction in tumor size, inhibition of tumor growth,inhibition of vascularization, inhibition of cellular proliferation, aninduction in dormancy or an apparent induction of dormancy, or adecreased metastasis of a tumor or a tumor cell.

The terms “cancer,” “carcinoma,” and “cancerous” when used herein referto or describe the physiological condition, preferably in a mammaliansubject, that is typically characterized by unregulated cell growth.Examples of types of cancer include but are not limited to, carcinoma,lymphoma, sarcoma, blastoma and leukemia. More particular examples ofsuch cancers include squamous cell carcinoma, lung cancer, pancreaticcancer, cervical cancer, bladder cancer, kidney cancer, gliobastoma,hepatoma, breast cancer, prostate carcinoma, colon carcinoma, headcancer, neck cancer rhabdomyosarcoma, osteosarcoma, leiomysarcoma,myelogenous leukemia, lymphocytic leukemia, multiple myeloma, Hodgkinslymphoma; and B-ceH lymphomas. While the term “cancer” as used herein isnot limited to any one specific form of the disease, it is believed thatthe methods of the invention will be particularly effective for cancerswhich are found to be accompanied by increased levels of HGF orexpression of Met. Examples of such cancers include, but are not limitedto, lung cancer, pancreatic cancer, bladder cancer, kidney cancer,gioblastoma, prostate cancer, osteosarcoma and soft tissue sarcoma.

The antibodies are preferably administered to the subject, patient, orcell in a pharmaceutically-acceptable carrier. Suitable carriers andtheir formulations are described in Remington's Pharmaceutical Sciences,16th ed., 1980, Mack Publishing Co., edited by Oslo et al. Typically, anappropriate amount of a pharmaceutically-acceptable salt is used in theformulation to render the formulation isotonic. Examples of thepharmaceutically-acceptable carrier include saline, Ringer's solutionand dextrose solution. The pH of the solution is preferably from about 5to about 8, and more preferably from about 7 to about 7.5. Furthercarriers include sustained release preparations such as semipermeablematrices of solid hydrophobic polymers containing the antibody, whichmatrices are in the form of shaped articles, e.g., films, liposomes ormicroparticles. It will be apparent to those persons skilled in the artthat certain carriers may be more preferable depending upon, forinstance, the route of administration and concentration of antibodybeing administered.

The antibodies can be administered to the subject, patient, or cell byinjection (e.g., intravenous, intraperitoneal, subcutaneous,intramuscular), or by other methods such as infusion that ensure itsdelivery to the bloodstream in an effective form. The antibodies mayalso be administered by intratumoral, peritumoral, intralesional, orperilesional routes, to exert local as well as systemic therapeuticeffects. Local or intravenous injection is preferred.

Effective dosages and schedules for administering the antibodies may bedetermined empirically, and making such determinations is within theskill in the art. Those skilled in the art will understand that thedosage of antibodies that must be administered will vary depending on,for example, the mammal which will receive the antibody, the route ofadministration, the particular type of antibody used and other drugsbeing administered. Guidance in selecting appropriate doses forantibodies is found in the literature on therapeutic uses of antibodies,e.g., Handbook of Monoclonal Antibodies, Ferrone et al., eds., NogesPublications, Park Ridge, N.J.; (1985) ch. 22 and pp. 303-357; Smith etal., Antibodies in Human Diagnosis and Therapy, Haber et al., eds.;Raven Press, New York (1977) pp. 365-389. A typical daily dosage of theantibody used alone might range from about 1 μg/kg to up to 100 mg/kg ofbody weight or more per day, depending on the factors mentioned above.For example, a typical antibody dosage range could be 1 mg/kg to 8 mg/kgas described in Tokuda et al. (“Dose escalation and pharmacokineticstudy of a humanized anti-HER2 inonoclonal antibody in patients withHER2/neu-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer” Br. J. Cancer 81:1419-1425 (1999).

The antibodies may also be administered in combination with effectiveamounts of one or more other therapeutic agents or in conjunction withradiation treatment. Therapeutic agents contemplated includechemotherapeutics as well as immunoadjuvants and cytokines.Chemotherapies contemplated by the invention include chemical substancesor drugs which are known in the art and are commercially available, suchas Doxorubicin, 5-Fluorouracil, Cytosine arabinoside (“Ara-C”),Cyclophosphamide, Thiotepa, Busulfan, Cytoxin, Taxol, Methotrexate,Cisplatin, Melphalan, Vinblastine and Carboplatin. The antibodies may beadministered sequentially or concurrently with the one or more othertherapeutic agents. The amounts of antagonist and therapeutic agentdepend, for example, on what type of drugs are used, the condition beingtreated, and the scheduling and routes of administration but wouldgenerally be less than if each were used individually. Followingadministration of antibodies, the condition can be monitored in variousways well known to the skilled practitioner. For instance, tumor massmay be observed physically or by standard x-ray imaging techniques.

The present invention further provides a method of screening a subjectfor the presence of a developmental disorder comprising: contacting atissue sample from the subject with a combination of anti-HGF/SFantibodies, detecting the binding of the antibodies with an antigen inthe tissue sample, whereby a reduction in binding of antigen to theantibodies in the tissue sample relative to the binding of antigen froma control tissue sample to the antibodies indicates a decreased amountof hepatocyte growth factor in the sample, whereby the reduction in theamount of hepatocyte growth factor indicates a developmental disorder ispresent in the patient, thereby screening the subject for the presenceof a developmental disorder. Binding of antigen to antibody can bemeasured by methods known in the art and as described in the Examples,such as by ELISA, immunohistochemistry or Western blot.

The sample of this invention can be from any organism and can be, but isnot limited to, peripheral blood, bone marrow specimens, primary tumors,embedded tissue sections, frozen tissue sections, cell preparations,cytological-preparations, exfoliate samples (e.g., sputum), fine needleaspirations, amnion cells, fresh tissue, dry tissue, and cultured cellsor tissue. The sample can be unfixed or fixed according to standardprotocols widely available in the art and can also be embedded in asuitable medium for preparation of the sample. For example, the samplecan be embedded in paraffin or other suitable medium (e.g., epoxy oracrylamide) to facilitate preparation of the biological specimen for thedetection methods of this invention. Furthermore, the sample can beembedded in any commercially available mounting medium, either aqueousor organic.

The sample can be on, supported by, or attached to, a substrate whichfacilitates detection. A substrate of the present invention can be, butis not limited to, a microscope slide, a culture dish, a culture flask,a culture plate, a culture chamber, ELISA plates, as well as any othersubstrate that can be used for containing or supporting biologicalsamples for analysis according to the methods of the present invention.The substrate can be of any material suitable for the purposes of thisinvention, such as, for example, glass, plastic, polystyrene, mica andthe like. The substrates of the present invention can be obtained fromcommercial sources or prepared according to standard procedures wellknown in the art.

The present invention also provides a method of in vivo detection of theHGF/SF antibody combinations comprising administering the HGF/SFantibodies conjugated to a tracer to a subject and imaging theantibodies. Tracers that may be conjugated to the antibodies are knownin the art and include radiolabels such as 99 mTc, 111In, 125I, 131I.Imaging techniques are also known in the art and includeimmunoscintography, single photon emission computed tomographic imagingand high-resolution gamma-camera imaging (Sato et al. 1999.“Intratumoral distribution of radiolabeled antibody andradioimmunotherapy in experimental liver metastases model of nude mouse”J. Nucl. Med; 40:685-692; Reilly 1993 “Immunoscintography of tumoursusing 99Tcm-labelled monoclonal antibodies: a review” Nucl. Med. Commun.14:347-359.) One skilled in the art would be able to select theappropriate combination of tracer and imaging technique to detect theHGF/SF antibodies in vivo.

The in vivo imaging of the HGF/SF antibody combinations can be utilizedfor diagnostic purposes, prognostic purposes as well as for theintraoperative detection of metastatic deposits.

One skilled in the art will appreciate that the HGF/Met pathway isinvolved in fundamental biological activities such as the formation oftubules and lumens, the promotion of angiogenesis, the inhibition ofcell growth, and the conversion from a mesenchymal to an epithelialphenotype. In vivo, this ligand-receptor pair is believed to play a rolein neural induction, kidney development, tissue regeneration, woundhealing, and is required for normal embryological development. Thereforethe levels of HGF in a tissue sample can indicate the status of the cellwith respect to its developmental state. One skilled in the art willappreciate that the monoclonal antibodies provided by this invention canbe used in many detection procedures to detect and quantitate the levelsof HGF in the cell or tissue, and therefore screen a patient or subjectfor the presence of a developmental disorder. Additionally, the HGF/Metpathway is required for normal embryological development and decreasedlevels of HGF can result in defective organogenesis resulting indevelopmental abnormalities. In one embodiment of the present invention,the developmental disorder comprises those conditions resulting from anabnormal epithelial-mesenchymal cell conversion.

Further provided by the present invention is a method of detecting thepresence of cancer in a patient comprising: contacting a tissue samplefrom the subject with a combination of anti-HGF/SF antibodies, detectingthe binding of the antibodies with an antigen in the sample, whereby anincreased binding of antigen to the antibodies relative to the bindingof antigen from a control tissue sample to the antibodies indicates anincreased amount of hepatocyte growth factor in the sample, whereby theincreased amount of hepatocyte growth factor indicates the presence ofcancerous tissue in the sample, thereby detecting the presence of cancerin the patient.

Also provided by the present invention is a method of determining theprogression of cancer comprising: contacting a tissue sample from apatient having a cancer with a combination of anti-HGF/SF antibodies,detecting the binding of the antibodies with an antigen, measuring theamount of antigen in the sample, and correlating the binding of theantibodies with the antigen with a particular stage of cancerdevelopment, thereby determining the progression of cancer in thepatient.

Since therapy and clinical decisions are often dependent on diagnosis,HGF detection with this antibody allows correlation of HGF expressionlevels with a particular stage of cancerous development. One skilled inthe art would be able to measure HGF in numerous subjects in order toestablish ranges of HGF expression that correspond to clinically definedstages of cancerous development. The process of determining the clinicalstages of cancer are well defined for most cancers in the literature.These ranges will allow the skilled practitioner to measure HGF in asubject diagnosed with cancer and correlate the levels in each subjectwith arrange that corresponds to a stage of cancer. One skilled in theart would also know that by measuring HGF in the patient at differentintervals, the progression of the cancer can be determined. For example,if the patient is assayed for the presence of HGF at a first time pointand the amount of HGF increases when the patient is assayed at a secondtime point, the skilled artisan would know the cancer has, progressed.If the HGF decreases when the patient is assayed at a second time point,the skilled practitioner would know the cancer has not progressed.Treatment regimens can, therefore, be adjusted correspondingly.

A person skilled in the art would know that the methods of thisinvention can be utilized to test the efficacy of anticancer treatment.For example, if the patient diagnosed with cancer is assayed for thepresence of HGF prior to the administration of an anticancer treatmentand assayed at a second time point after the administration of theanticancer treatment, a decrease in the level of HGF may indicate aneffective anticancer treatment had been administered. The skilledpractitioner will associate the decreases observed with a particularlevel of effectiveness. If no decrease is observed, the anticancertreatment may need to be adjusted.

Numerous examples are present in the art for diagnosing andprognosticating HGF/SF related disorders by detecting HGF/SF (Shikano etal. 2000 “Usefulness of serum hepatocyte growth factor for the diagnosisof amyloidosis” Intern Med. 39: 715-719; Ohnishi et al. 2000.“Development of highly sensitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays forhepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor (HGF/SF): determination ofHGF/SF in serum and urine from normal human subjects” J. Immunol.Methods 244: 163-173; Malatino et al. 2000. “Hepatocyte growth factorpredicts survival and relates to inflammation and intima media thicknessin end-stage renal disease” Am. J. Kidney Dis. 36: 945-52; Gohji et al.2000. “Independent prognostic value of serum heptocyte growth factor inbladder cancer” J. Clin. Oncol. 18: 2963-71;

It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that variousmodifications and variations can be made in the present inventionwithout departing from the scope or spirit of the invention. Otherembodiments of the invention will be apparent to those skilled in theart from consideration of the specification and practice of theinvention disclosed herein. It is intended that the specification andexamples be considered as exemplary only, with a true scope and spiritof the invention being indicated by the claims included herein.

EXAMPLE I Anti-HGF/SF Antibody Production

Murine anti-HGF/SF monoclonal antibodies (Mab) were developed by fusionof the OUR-I myeloma cell line obtained from the American Type CultureCollection (ATCC) with spleen cells of a Balb/C mouse hyper-immunizedwith native HGF/SF. The fusion was performed when the mouse serumdisplayed positive neutralizing activity. ELISA positive hybridomas werere-cloned, and neutralizing activity was first screened in the MDCK cellscatter assay. Eight hybridoma cell lines were selected and ascites wereproduced and purified by FPLC protein-G column (Table 1).

MDCK Scattering Assay

No single Mab showed significant inhibition of HGF/SF mediatedscattering activity in Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) cells whilepooled Mabs inhibited MDCK scattering. Whether or not it was possiblefor a specific sub-set of the Mabs to efficiently neutralize HGF/SFactivity was determined. Combinations of two or three of the antibodieswere tested and it was determined that antibodies. 1+4+7; 1+5+7; 1+4+10or 1+5+10 were able to block HGF/SF activity at low antibodyconcentration in the branching morphogenesis assay (Table 1). However,1+5+7 displayed the strongest neutralizing activity when tested in thein vitro invasion assay (Table 2). Thus, in in vitro invasion assaysusing ARZ-2 renal carcinoma cells (6), individual Mab did not inhibitHGF/SF activity 1+5+7 completely abolished the activity. Importantly, aslittle as 5 μg of total IgG was able to completely neutralize 1 μg ofHGF/SF. The combination of antibodies 1+5+7 is able to inhibit HGF/SFmediated MDCK cells scattering or ARZ-2 renal carcinoma cell in vitroinvasion.

Antibody Interference Mapping Studies

Mapping studies by antibody interference mapping (AIM) (FIG. 1 and Table3) were also performed. These analyses reveal the interference patternof Mabs and are consistent with the neutralizing activity. Thus,antibodies #1, 5, and 7 can be used together as a strong HGF/SFinhibitor.

The anti-HGF/SF Mabs were found to be useful in ELISA assays (Table 4).Moreover, the reactivity of the five individual Mabs was characterizedby ELISA against either the whole HGF/SF molecule or the a-subunit NK2domain (Table 4). These studies show that #1, 4, 5, 7, and 10 arereactive against HGF/SF, but only #1 and 5 are reactive to NK2 and #7shows a 10 fold lower reactivity against NK2 vs. HGF/SF.

The anti-HGF/SF Mabs are also very useful for immunohistochemicalstaining and very effective in immunoprecipitation analyses.

Antitumor Activity

Several combinations of anti-HGF/SF antibodies provided by thisinvention were tested and found to possess antitumor activity in a mousemodel tumor system previously described by Jeffers et al.

EXAMPLE II Cell Lines

MDCK cells were cultured in DMEM medium supplemented with 5% fetalbovine serum (FBS). S-114 cells (transformed with human HGF/SF and Met)(13) were grown in DMEM containing 8% of calf serum. ARZ-2 human renalcarcinoma cell line (6) was maintained in DMEM containing 10% FBS. C-127cell line is NIH 3T3 transformed with human HGF/SF and mouse Met (14),and U-118 cell line is established from human glioma that co-expressesHGF/SF and Met (11). Both cells were maintained in DMEM supplementedwith 10% FBS. All cell lines were cultured at 37° C., 5% CO₂.

Immunization for Mab Production

Rabbit polyclonal antibody to HGF/SF was used as positive control.HGF/SF was prepared from S114 cells (15), and mouse Mabs against theligand were produced by injecting Balb/C mice IP with purified nativeand denatured (by boiling in sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) sample buffer)HGF/SF protein in complete Freund's adjuvant, followed by fouradditional injections in incomplete Fruend's adjuvant. After one month,a final HGF/SF injection was given IP and IV without adjuvant.Polyclonal antisera from immunized mice were tested for HGF/SF specificantibodies by ELISA, and for neutralizing activity in the MDCK cellscatter assay. The serum from animals immunized with denatured HGF/SFnever displayed neutralizing activity to HGF/SF in the scatter assay.Spleen cells were fused with P3X63AF8/653 myeloma cells using standardtechniques three days after final injections.

ELISA Screening

Hybridoma cells were screened for reactivity to HGF/SF by ELISA using 96well plates coated with 2.5 ug/ml of HGF/SF in coating buffer (0.2MNa₂CO₃/NaHCO₃, pH9.6, 50 μl/well) overnight at 4° C. The plates werethen blocked with PBS containing 1% BSA (200 μl/well) for one hour atroom temperature (RT) or overnight at 4° C. Fifty micro liters ofhybridoma supernatant were added to wells for 1.5 hours at RT. Plateswere washed two times in washing buffer (PBS with 0.05% Tween-20), andalkaline phosphatase coupled goat-anti-mouse IgG (Sigma) was added (50μl/well) at 1:3,000 dilution for 1.5 hours at RT. After washing fourtimes in washing buffer, phosphatase substrate CP-nitrophenylphosphate,purchased from Kirkegaard and Perry, was added for 30 min and absorbancewas measured at 405 nm. Hybridomas with strong reactivity with HGF/SF(OD value greater than 0.5, negative controls lower than 0.02) werere-cloned twice, and reactivity was confirmed by ELISA.

HGF/SF Neutralization in the MDCK Scatter Assay

Re-cloned hybridomas supernatants, either individually or in pools, weretested for neutralizing activity to HGF/SF using the MDCK cell scatterassay. Briefly, MDCK cells were cultivated in DMEM with 5% FBS at 37°C., 5% CO 2 overnight. Three hundred micro liters of supernatants(either individually or as pools) were added to 96 well plates. Two foldserial dilutions were made with DMEM, 5% FBS. MDCK cells weretrypsinized, re-suspended in culture medium and cell density wasadjusted to 7.5×10⁵/ml before plating (100 μl/well) and addition ofHGF/SF (5 ng/well). Positive and negative control wells contained eitherMDCK cells only or HGF/SF with or without rabbit polyclonal neutralizingantiserum (1 μl/well). Plates were placed at 37° C. (5% CO₂) overnight;cells were then stained with 0.5% crystal violet, 50% ethanol (v/v) for10 min at RT, and scattering was viewed using a light microscope.Ascites were prepared from the hybridoma cell lines showing thestrongest neutralizing activity. The IgGs were purified from protein-Gcolumn and adjusted to a final Mab concentration of 2 mg/ml.Neutralizing activity in the MDCK scatter assay was tested for each or acombination of antibodies.

Branching Morphogenesis Assay

Semi-confluent SK-LMS-1 cell cultures were washed twice with PBS (Camand Mg⁺⁺ free) and 4 ml Trypsin-EDTA was added before the cultures wereincubated for 5 minutes at 37° C. (6). After centrifugation (5 min,1,000×g) at 4° C., 5×10⁴ cells in 62.5 μl DMEM-10% FBS were mixed withan equal volume of nondiluted GFR-Matrigel on ice, placed at 125 μl perwell in a 96 well culture plate, and incubated for 30 min in 10% CO₂ at37° C. After incubation, 125 μl of DMED-10% FBS, alone or supplementedwith HGF/SF, and with or without neutralizing Mabs at the indicatedconcentration, was placed on top of the gel. After 72 to 96 hours ofincubation at 37° C., representative wells were photographed at 400×magnification.

Immunohistochemistry

S-114 cells expressing HGF/SF and Met were fixed in either formaldehydeor Acetone/Methanol (50/50, v/v) for 10 minutes at RT, air dried for 10minutes, then incubated with test Mabs mixed with either rabbitanti-HGF/SF polyclonal antibody or C-28 rabbit anti-Met polyclonalantibody at 37° C. for one hour for co-localization analysis. Cells werewashed two times with PBS, and incubated with goat anti-mouse FITC andgoat anti-rabbit rhodamine conjugates for one hour at 37° C. The sampleswere observed by confocal microscopy.

HGF/SF Immunoprecipitation

S-114 cells (13,15) expressing human HGF/SF and Met were grown in 75 cm²flask in serum free medium, and cultured for 48 hours at 37° C., 5% CO₂.The supernatant containing HGF/SF was centrifuged and pre-incubated withnormal rabbit serum and protein-G beads for two hours on ice. Aftercentrifugation, 1 ml of supernatant was reacted with each HGF/SF Mab (orcontrol mouse IgG) with shaking at 4° C. for one hour. Twenty microliters of protein-G beads (50%, v/v) was added to each tube andincubated at 4° C. overnight with shaking. The immune complexes werewashed three times with PBS. Bound proteins were eluted by heating thebeads to 95° C. for 10 min with 50 ul of 2×SDS sample buffer. Theproteins were separated by 10% SDS-PAGE gel, and then transferred ontoPVDF membrane (Bio-Rad). The membrane was blocked in 1% BSA/PBS (Sigma)overnight at 4° C., and incubated for 1.5 hours at RT in 1:4,000 diluted(blocking buffer) with rabbit polyclonal anti-HGF/SF antibody. Afterfour washes (PBS containing 0.05% Tween-20), five minutes each, themembrane was reacted with goat anti-rabbit IgG alkaline phosphataseconjugate (1:10,000, sigma) for an additional 1.5 hours with shaking atRT. Following the same washing, the detection reagent, chemoilluminatesubstrate (Bio-Rad) was placed to the membrane.

Western Blot

Purified human HGF/SF (15) or the NK2 protein subunit were mixed witheither SDS sample buffer or native buffer (Bio-Rad) and heated at 95° C.for ten minutes with 0.5 μg of HGF/SF or 0.4 μg of NK2 was loaded toeach 4-15% gradient SDS-PAGE 2-D prep ready gel (Bio-Rad). Separatedproteins were transferred to PVDF membrane and blocked with 1% BSA/PBSovernight at 4° C. The membrane was rinsed, dried and cut into teststrips. Each Mab was diluted to 1:1,000 with blocking buffer and allowedto react for 1.5 hours at RT. After washing 4×, goat anti-mouse IgGalkaline phosphatase conjugate was added at 1:10,000 dilution andincubated 1.5 hours at RT. The strips were washed four times before thechemoilluminate substrate was added.

Antibody Interference Analysis

Each Mab was placed in the primary position for Biacor (Pharmacia)analyses, and the relative binding of each Mab in the panel ofantibodies was evaluated. The mean signal due to non-self associatingantibodies used both in primary and secondary positions were taken asthe value for complete interference. When the sandwich signal wasgreater than two standard deviations above the complete interferencelevel, the antibodies bind independently to human HGF/SF. When thesignal is equal or less than the complete interference level, the twoantibodies interfere.

Mab Inhibition of Tumor Growth in Athymic Nude Mice Tumor Activity

Animal experiments were performed using female athymic nude nu/nu miceat six weeks of age. Mab combinations (e.g. A.1, 5,7) prepared againstnative HGF/SF were compared to non-neutralizing Mabs prepared againstdenatured HGF/SF.

C-127 cells expressing human HGF/SF and mouse Met were trypsinized,washed two times in PBS and re-suspended to 2×10⁶ cells/ml in PBS. Micewere divided into five groups and five mice per group. Each mouse wasinjected s.c. with 0.1 ml of C-127 cell suspension (2×10⁵ cells permouse). At day one post cell injection, antibodies were administered(100 μl/animal) at 2 mg/ml concentration. Group 1 animals were injecteds.c. intra-tumor with the Mab A.1, 5 and 7. Group 2 animals wereinjected I.P. with the same Map pool. Groups 3 and 4 were injected witha combination of Mabs 7-2, 3, reactive with denatured HGF/SF, butnon-neutralizing, and either s.c. or I.P. respectively. Group 5 animalsreceived C-127 tumor cells, but no antibodies. The antibody injectionswere repeated everyday for 20 days, and tumor size was measured twice aweek. The experiments were terminated when the control group needed tobe sacrificed due to tumor size.

The U-118 cell line, a human glioblastoma multiforme tumor cell line wasshown previously to express HGF/SF and Met (11). Cells were injected asfollows: 5×10⁵ U-118 cells were injected s.c. into seven mice per group.As in the C127 studies above, neutralizing Mab combination A.1, 5 and 7,and non-neutralizing Mab combination 7-2, 3 were injected twice a week(100 μl/animal of a 2 mg/ml Mab concentrate) until 10 weeks post cellinjection, then all animals were terminated.

The tumor regression experiment was performed using the U-118 cell line.5×10⁵ cells were injected s.c. into each mouse for total 60 mice. At 30days post cells injection, animals were divided to five groups, 10 miceper group with average tumor size about 100 mm³. Neutralizing (A.1,5,7)and control (7-2,3) Mab combinations were either s.c. (intra-tumor) orI.P. injected every two days (100 μl/mouse at 2 mg/ml Mab concentration)until 10 weeks.

Production of Mabs to hHGF/SF

Mabs were raised against both native and denatured HGF/SF. Serum fromHGF/SF immunized mice was tested for neutralizing activity in the MDCKscatter assay, and only serum from mice immunized with native HGF/SFinhibited scattering. After fusion of spleen cells with P3X63AF8/653myeloma cells, single clones of hybridoma cells reactive with HGF/SFwere selected, and Mabs against native and denatured HGF/SF were testedindividually for neutralizing activity in the MDCK scatter assay. Noneof the Mabs displayed activity. However, since the serum from the miceimmunized with native HGF/SF displayed neutralizing activity, Mabculture supernatants were pooled to test for neutralization activityagainst HGF/SF. One group of 10 pooled Mabs (A.1-10) showed strongneutralizing activity to HGF/SF (Table 5). None of the pools of Mabsagainst denatured HGF/SF displayed neutralizing activity.

To further characterize the A.1-10 pool, ascites were producedindividually and Mabs were purified on a protein-G column, adjusted to 2mg/ml, and tested in various combinations to determine which members ofthe pool contributed to neutralizing activity (Table 5). It was foundthat combinations of any of two Mabs of A.1-10 did not neutralizescattering, even when Mabs were used at concentrations of micrograms ofMabs to nanograms of HGF/SF. However, when three or more Mabs werecombined, seven different combinations were identified with significantneutralizing activity (<30:1, Table 5). A combination of four Mabs,which included A.1, and any three of Mabs A.4, 5, 7 or 10, had thehighest activity. However, combinations of Mab A.1, plus either A.4 or 5and 7 or 10, also efficiently neutralized HGF/SF mediated MDCK scatteractivity with Mabs A.1,5,7 and/or A.1,5,10 showing the greatestneutralizing activity (Table 5, FIG. 2). The Mab “7” series incombination with the Mabs generated against denatured HGF/SF (7,2,3,4)did not prevent scattering (FIG. 2).

Branching Morphogenesis

The neutralizing activity of the Mabs in the HGF/SF mediated branchingmorphogenesis assay was tested. Again, the Mab combination A.1, 5, 7displayed the greatest inhibitory activity (Table 5, FIG. 3). However,A.4 or 5, with 7 or 10, also show significant activity, indicating thatsomething provided by the basement membrane matrigel or the SKLMS-1cells, excludes the requirement for Mab A.1.

Immunoprecipitation, Western Analyses and Immunohistochemistry with AntiHGF/SF Mabs

Mabs were further characterized by immunohistochemistry analysesperformed on S-114 NIH3T3 cells expressing both human HGF/SF and Metmolecules. Cells were fixed with either acetone/methanol orformaldehyde. S-114 cells fixed in acetone/methanol and stained with MabA.10 and rabbit anti-HGF/SF antibody, show colocalization of staining.Each of the Mabs A.1,4,5,7 and 7-2,3,4 display similar colocalization ofstaining with the rabbit anti-HGF/SF serum, demonstrating theirspecificity to HGF/SF. Using the same fixation conditions, the Mabs toHGF/SF do not colocalize with the rabbit polyclonal antibody (C-28)staining to Met. Moreover, the neutralizing Mabs give a stronger signalin acetone/methanol fixed cells (Table 6). Mab 7-2 raised againstdenatured HGF/SF, and Mab A.10, were very effective for staining bothacetone/methanol and formaldehyde fixed cells (Table 6). Theseneutralizing Mabs are also very effective for immunoprecipitating nativeHGF/SF from cell supernatants, while the Mabs to denatured HGF/SF donot. However, the neutralizing Mabs do not recognize denatured HGF/SF onWestern analysis, while the 7 series Mabs to denatured HGF/SF work well.

Of all the Mabs directed to native HGF/SF, only Mab A.1 reacts with theN-terminal NK2 priority. To test for epitope differences, the Mabs weresubjected to antibody interference analysis. By these analyses, the fiveneutralizing Mabs recognized at least four different HGF/SF epitopes,with Mabs 4 and 5 apparently reacting with the same epitope. Theseresults show that Mab A.1 and either A.4 or A.5 with either A.7 or A.10,are required to efficiently neutralize HGF/SF activity.

Anti-Tumor Activity of the HGF/SF Neutralizing Mab Combination

Cells with autocrine Met-HGF/SF signaling are tumorigenetic andmetastastic in nude mice (14-17). There is also evidence for autocrinesignaling of this ligand receptor pair in human tumors, such as humanosteosarcomas and glioblastoma multiforme. To determine whether theneutralizing Mab to human HGF/SF has any effect on tumors in-vivo,animal experiments were performed with C-127 mouse cells created toexpress mouse MET and human HGF/SF in an autocrine fashion. These cells(2×10⁵) when injected S.C. formed tumors in athymic nude mice in two tothree weeks. Animals injected with C-127 were also injected with eitherMabs A.1,5,7, or 7-2,3,4, either s. c. or i. p. every day for 20 days.The experiment was terminated at 37 days post C-127 cell injection.Dramatically, the Mab A.1,5,7 treated animals showed 90% inhibition oftumor growth with either s.c. or i.p. Mab injection, compared to thecontrols (FIG. 4).

Using the same procedure described above, the Mab A.1,5,7 combinationwas tested in-vivo versus the U-118 GBM tumor cells. Human glioma celllines co-express HGF/SF and Met which are postulated to contribute totumorigenesis. In this experiment, Mabs were injected two times in oneweek for 70 days. Intra-tumor (s.c.) injection of the neutralizing Mabcombination completely inhibited tumor growth. While i.p. injection wasless effective, the average tumor size of this group was diminishedcompared to the control groups (FIG. 5). Moreover, in animals in whichMab treatment was initiated 30 days after the U-118 GBM tumor cells wereinjected subcutaneously, a significant delay in tumor growth wasobserved in the animals receiving. Mab-A.1,5,7 every other day for up to70 days. While tumour regression did not occur, tumor growth was reduced(FIG. 6).

Throughout this application various publications are referenced. Thedisclosures of all of these publications and those references citedwithin those publications in their entireties are hereby incorporated byreference into this application in order to more fully describe thestate of the art to which this invention pertains.

REFERENCES

-   1. Matsumoto, K., et al. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273:22913-22920.-   2. Hartmann, G., et al. (1992) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.    89:11574-11578.-   3. Matsumoto, K., et al. (1991) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.    181:691-69S.-   4. Okigaki, M., et al. (1992) Biochem. 31:9555-9551.-   5. Lokker, N. A. and P. J. Godowski (1993) J. Biol. Chem.    268:17145-17150.-   6. Koochekpour, S., et al. (1999) Mol. Cell. Biol. 19:(In Press).-   7. Sonnenberg, E., et al. (1993) J. Cell Biol. 123:223-235.-   8. Grant, D. S., et al. (1993) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.    90:1937-1941.-   9. Uehara, Y. and N. Kitamura (1992) J. Cell Biol. 117:889-894.-   10. Nakamura, T. (1991) Prog. Growth Factor Res. 3:67-85.-   11. Koochekpour, S., et al. (1997) Cancer Res. 57:5391-5398.-   12. Rong, S., et al. (1994) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.    91:4731-4735.-   13. Rong S, Bodescot M, Blair D, Dunn J, Nakamura T, Mizuno K, Park    M, Chan A, Aaronson S, Vande Woude G F (1992) Mol Cell Biol    12:5152-5158.-   14. Jeffers M, Rong S, Anver M, Vande Woude G F (1996) Oncogene    13:853-861.-   15. Rong S, Oskarsson M, Faletto D, Tsarfaty I, Resau J H, Nakamura    T, Rosen E, Hopkins R F 3d, Vande Woude T (1993) Cell Growth Differ    4:563-9.-   16. Jeffers M, Rong S, Vande Woude G F (1996) J. Mol. Med.    74:505-513.-   17. Rong S, Segal S, Anver M, Resau J H, Vande Woude G F (1994)    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91:4731-4735.

TABLE 1 The effect of monoclonal antibodies on branching morphogenesisof ARZ-2 renal carcinoma cell line^(a) 20/1^(c/d) 10/1 5/1 1/1 Neg. CTRL− − − − Pos. CTRL ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ PolyAb CTRL^(b) − − − − 1 ++++++++ ++++ ++++ 5 ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ 7 ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ 1 + 5 ++ +++++++ ++++ 1 + 7 ++ +++ ++++ ++++ 5 + 7 − − − + 1 + 4 + 7 + + ++ +++ 1 +5 + 7 − − − + 1 + 4 + 10 + + ++ +++ 1 + 5 + 10 + + ++ +++ Pooled + + ++++++ ^(a)Branching morphogenesis was performed according to standardprotocol (11). ^(b)Rabbit polyclonal neutralizing anti-HGF antibody wasused as positive control antibody for inhibition of branchingmorphogenesis. ^(c)Nanogram per ml of anti-HGF neutralizing antibody.^(d)Nanogram per ml of HGF.

TABLE 2 The effect of monoclonal antibodies on Renal Carcinoma cellsinvasion through Matrigel coated filters^(a) 20/1^(b/c) 10/1 5/1 1/1−HGF (Neg.)   800 + 39^(d)  ND^(e) ND ND +HGF (Pos.) 2100 + 76 ND ND NDMAb 1 2190 + 83 2146 + 74 2216 + 53 1970 + 54 MAb 5 1935 + 67 2112 + 692164 + 66 2212 + 71 MAb7 2186 + 75 2040 + 81 1996 + 59 2200 + 82 MAb 5 +7 1116 + 64 1272 + 52 1340 + 44 1766 + 51 Mab 1 + 5 + 7 1064 + 46 1186 +45 1224 + 41 1643 + 47 ^(a)Invasion assay was performed on ARZ-2 renalcarcinoma cell line according to the standard protocol (6). ^(b)Nanogramper ml of anti-HGF neutralizing antibody in lower chamber of transwellfilter. ^(c)Nanogram per ml of HGF in lower chamber of transwell filter.^(d)Each value represent the total number of cells invaded per filterand is the average of three independent experiments + SE. ^(e)Not done

TABLE 3 Epitope Mapping by Antibody Interference Sec. Pri. 1 4 5 7 10 10.328 6.045 13.096 13.372 31.924 4 9.067 0.341 1.674 4.28 14.923 517.571 0.327 1.065 11.016 22.315 7 89.378 62.237 57.936 6.692 147.184 1022.715 16.655 27.800 14.821 4.55 (Pseudo -affinity analysis method)

Each antibody in turn is placed in the primary position, and therelative binding of each antibody in the panel of antibodies in thesandwich is evaluated. The mean signal due to all non-self associatingantibodies used as both the primary and secondary positions are taken asthe value for complete interference. When the sandwich signal is greaterthan two standard deviations above the complete interference level, twoantibodies binding independently to the HGF/SF, when signal is equal toor less than the complete interference level, the two antibodiesinterfere. The above data showed that antibodies 1, 7 and 10 recognizedifferent epitopes of HGF/SF, 4 and 5 interference each other andrecognize other epitope of HGF/SF.

TABLE 4 MABs Epitope Mapping by ELISA ELISA OD ELISA OD MAb# HybridomaI.D. Anti-hHGF Anti-HGF/NK2 1 1C10-F1-A11 1.941 3.105 4 8H2-F2-B10 2.4320.043 5 13B1-E4-E10 2.934 1.807 7 15D7-B2 3.372 0.420 10 31D4-C9-D42.779 0.000

All of five antibodies showed high positive activity against the HGF/SFwhole molecule. Mabs 1, 5 and 7 are able to recognize NK2 domain withsignificantly decreased affinity for 5 and 7 and increased affinityfor 1. Mabs 4 and 10 do not bind to NK2.

TABLE 5 Inhibition of HGF/SF induced MDCK cells scattering and SK-LMS-1cells branching morphogenesis by monoclonal antibody combinations.Mabs:huHGF/SF (Molar ratio) MDCK Cells Branching Mabs CombinationScattering Morphogenesis Pool A (10 Mabs) 80:1 ND Pool B (10 Mabs) Neg.ND Pool C (11 Mabs) Neg. ND A.1, 4, 5, 7, 10 24:1 10:1 A.1, 4, 5, 7 20:110:1 A.1, 4, 5, 10 20:1 10:1 1, 4, 7, 10 20:1 10:1 A.1, 5, 7, 10 20:110:1 A.1, 4, 5 Neg. Neg. A.1, 4, 7 60:1 40:1 A.1, 4, 10 60:1 20:1 A.1,5, 7 30:1 10:1 A.1, 5, 10 30:1 10:1 A.1, 7, 10 240:1  Neg. A.4, 5, 7Neg. 40:1 A.4, 5, 10 Neg. 20:1 A.4, 7, 10 Neg. 40:1 A.5, 7, 10 Neg. 40: MDCK cells scatter assay: Each Mab combination was 2 fold diluted fromwell #1 to well #12 in 96 well plate (150 μl/well) with DMEM medium,hHGF/SF was adjusted to 5 ng in 100 μl cell suspension (finalconcentration was 20 ng/ml). Positive controls were MDCK cells only, andhHGF/SF with rabbit polyclonal neutralizing antibody. Negative controlwas MDCK cells with hHGF/SF only. Cells were fixed and stained prior tophotography. SK-LMS-1 cells branching morphogenesis assay: hHGF/SF wasused at 250 ng/ml, Mab combinations were from 1, 2, 4, 8 and 16 ug/ml.Results were read and photographed after 96 hours incubation.

TABLE 6 The ability of neutralizing and control Mabs to stain fixedS-114 cells. A.1 A.4 A.5 A.7 A.10 7-2 7-3 A ++ + + ++ +++ +++ ++ B −− + + +++ +++ 7 S-114 cells were fixed either with Acetone/Methanol(50:50, v/v) line A, or formaldehyde line B. All Mabs were 2 mg/ml andused at 1:100 dilution. Goat anti-mouse IgG FITC conjugate was dilutedat 1:16.

1. A combination of anti-HGF/SF antibodies that specifically bindsHGF/SF and inhibits HGF/SF activity.
 2. A combination of anti-HGF/SFantibodies comprising three or more anti-HGF/SF antibodies selected fromthe group consisting of: antibody #1 produced from hybridoma1C10-F1-A11, antibody #4 produced from hybridoma 8H2-F2-B 10, antibody#5 produced from hybridoma 13B1-E4-E10, antibody #7 produced fromhybridoma 15D7-B2, and antibody #10 produced from hybridoma 31D4-C9-D4.3. The combination of claim 2, comprising antibody #1 produced fromhybridoma 1C10-F1-A11, antibody #5 produced from hybridoma 13B1-E4-E10and antibody #7 produced from hybridoma 15D7-B2.
 4. The combination ofclaim 2, comprising antibody #1 produced from hybridoma 1C10-F1-A11,antibody #4 produced from hybridoma 8H2-F2-B10 and antibody #7 producedfrom hybridoma 15D7-B2.
 5. The combination of claim 2, comprisingantibody #1 produced from hybridoma 1C10-F1-A11, antibody #5 producedfrom hybridoma 13B1-E4-E10 and antibody #10 produced from hybridoma31D4-C9-D4.
 6. The combination of claim 2, comprising antibody #1produced from hybridoma 1-10-F1-A11, antibody #4 produced from hybridoma8H2-F2-B10 and antibody #10 produced from hybridoma 31D4-C9-D4. 7.Anti-HGF/SF antibody A.1 produced from hybridoma 1C10-F1-A11.
 8. Acomposition comprising the antibody of claim
 7. 9. Anti-HGF/SF antibodyA.4 produced from hybridoma 8H2-F2-B10.
 10. A composition comprising theantibody of claim
 9. 11. Anti-HGF/SF antibody A.5 produced fromhybridoma 13B1-E4-E10.
 12. A composition comprising the antibody ofclaim
 11. 13. Anti-HGF/SF antibody A.7 produced from hybridoma 15D7-B2.14. A composition comprising the antibody of claim
 13. 15. Anti-HGF/SFantibody A.10 produced from hybridoma 31D4-C9-D4.
 16. A compositioncomprising the antibody of claim
 15. 17. A method of treating cancer ina subject comprising administering to the subject the antibodies ofclaims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6, whereby the antibodies bind to a hepatocytegrowth factor, whereby the binding of the antibodies to a hepatocytegrowth factor results in an inhibition of hepatocyte growth factorbinding to the hepatocyte growth factor receptor, whereby the inhibitionof hepatocyte growth factor binding to receptor causes an inhibition ofcancer growth, thereby treating the cancer.
 18. A method of screening asubject for the presence of a developmental disorder comprising: a)contacting a tissue sample from the subject with the antibodies ofclaims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6; b) detecting the binding of the antibodieswith an antigen in the tissue sample, whereby a reduction in binding ofantigen to the antibodies in the tissue sample relative to the bindingof antigen from a control tissue sample to the antibodies indicates adecreased amount of hepatocyte growth factor in the sample; whereby thereduction in the amount of hepatocyte growth factor indicates adevelopmental disorder is present in the patient, thereby screening thesubject for the presence of a developmental disorder
 19. The method ofclaim 18 wherein the developmental disorder comprises those conditionsresulting from an abnormal epithelial-mesenchymal cell conversion.
 20. Amethod of determining the progression of cancer comprising: a)contacting a tissue sample from a patient having a cancer with theantibody of claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6; b) detecting the binding of theantibodies with an antigen; c) measuring the amount of antigen in thesample; and d) correlating the binding of the antibodies with theantigen with a clinically defined stage of cancer development, therebydetermining the progression of cancer in the patient.
 21. A method ofdetecting the presence of cancer in a patient comprising: a) contactinga tissue sample from the subject with the antibodies of claims 1, 2, 3,4, 5, or
 6. b) detecting the binding of the antibodies with an antigenin the sample, whereby an increased binding of antigen to the antibodiesrelative to the binding of antigen from a control tissue sample to theantibodies indicates an increased amount of hepatocyte growth factor inthe sample, whereby the increased amount of hepatocyte growth factorindicates the presence of cancerous tissue in the sample, therebydetecting the presence of cancer in the patient.